Olympics

Ah summer......in a year that can be divided by four....it must mean that it is time for the summer Olympics. I don't have access to cable or to a satellite dish. I seldom remember that I can watch at least the highlights via the internet. I am therefore, somewhat insulated from the hyper nationalism that seems to permeate the airwaves. And I am glad. It is not that I don't like watching some sports. The volleyball games (if they were broadcasted) the women's rugby or some of the track and field events could be entertaining. But what is broadcasted has little or nothing to do with what is worth watching. It has far more to do with what the producers of such marathons of over-indulgence think their national audience need to see to maintain national enthusiasm. It is not surprising therefore, that viewers of an American, British or Canadian broadcaster might see quite different Olympics. I appreciate that for the athletes and the people who love them, getting to the Olympics may be a life time goal. Someone however, needs to remind those who participate in and those who organize the games that (1) a significant number of the people living within walking distance of the various venues are dealing with life threatening issues and have neither the time nor the money to watch the coverage, never mind attend and (2) except for contributing an incredibly miniscule portion of my taxes towards supporting Olympic athletes  I have done nothing and therefore do not get the right to feel pride in "how well my country is doing".

I am sure it is exciting to be that young Canadian woman who has done so well in the pool, or those women from the women's rugby team that got a medal. I am equally as sure that as they mounted the podium to receive their medals the furthest thing from their minds were the hundreds of thousands Brazilians who live a kilometre or less from the venue and who struggle daily to earn enough money to feed themselves and their families. I am sure it is difficult to remember as they are having their hot showers that there are families just down the road who do not have access to running water. It is not their fault that there is so much poverty in the host country. If they had decided to boycott the Olympic games - nothing would have changed (although if all of the athletes boycotted - it might be interesting), the games would have gone on with other athletes. But surely it says something about a society that orchestrates such an excessive celebration of nationalism and elitist athletes. I understand the arguments as to why bringing the Olympics to a region should be good for the economy and the people  (I once had a wonderful ride from someone who had been part of the Calgary winter Olympic committee. He was quite eloquent about how much good it had done for the area and yes the ski jump/bob sled run are still in use for training almost 30 years later). But it seems to me that more and more, that as the costs go up, the benefits to the local region go down. It also seems to me the there is an inverse relationship between the wealth and stability of the country and how much the games actually benefit the area.

I believe that we should support people who want, at a personal level, to compete against themselves and others so that they can achieve their goals. I do not think that we should make such events about nationalism, nor should we make competing so expensive that athletes from poor nations cannot compete. The event should not cost so much money that the residents of the host county are dislocated and at the end of the games are in a worse position (financially and socially) than they were before. I am not suggesting that we make those elite international athletes less important or less valued but rather that we make the residents of the host country equally as important and as valued.